Terms of service

We use cookies to collect and analyse information on site performance and usage, and to enhance and customise content and advertisements.
By clicking "Accept" you agree to allow cookies to be placed.
To decline please click here.

To find out more or to change your cookie settings, visit the cookies section of our
Privacy Policy.

Be wary of declaring Novak Djokovic a 'GOAT contender' just yet - only a few months ago he was 'finished'

During the 20th century, stock investors' decisions were often so governed by the immediate past that a phrase was invented to describe their behaviour: recency bias.

This bias continues to be commonplace among investors, with many still falling into the trap of believing that companies on an upward trajectory will continue to thrive indefinitely. Some businesses may do so but the reality for the vast majority is that their fortunes will fluctuate.

But we should be wary of singling out investors for falling foul of recency bias. Take for example the tennis commentariat, who all too often worship at the altar of what has just happened (and I very much include myself in this).

Register for free to read this article, or log in to your Telegraph account.

During the 20th century, stock investors' decisions were often so governed by the immediate past that a phrase was invented to describe their behaviour: recency bias.

This bias continues to be commonplace among investors, with many still falling into the trap of believing that companies on an upward trajectory will continue to thrive indefinitely. Some businesses may do so but the reality for the vast majority is that their fortunes will fluctuate.

But we should be wary of singling out investors for falling foul of recency bias. Take for example the tennis commentariat, who all too often worship at the altar of what has just happened (and I very much include myself in this).

Novak Djokovic's recent renaissance is just the latest illustration of recency bias in action. If we look at his last two years in the round, we’d probably award it a solid seven out of 10. He hasn’t been as relentlessly dominant as he once was, but adding two grand-slam titles since September 2016 is a pretty decent return.

And yet during that time, Djokovic has gone from being branded “finished” to “back in the mix” to the main question being “could he overtake Roger Federer as the tennis GOAT (greatest of all time)?”

Djokovic looked down and out earlier this year
Credit: AP

Giving primacy to recent events is not limited to investors and tennis watchers - it is part of human nature, and was identified as such in the 19th century by the German psychologist Hermann Ebbinghaus. We show recency bias in our daily lives all the time, and it's often helpful. You're far more likely to give the greatest weight to your most recent journey into work, which might lead you to sensibly leave a little bit longer to get in tomorrow.

Paying close attention to the recent past is also a prerequisite for working in a fast-paced environment like journalism, even more so in the social media age.

But in an individual sport like tennis the seductive power of the freshest memory is even harder to resist. There are a number of reasons for this.

The first is that it is very hard for a player to scrape their way to a grand-slam title. While football teams for instance can win knockout competitions and not look altogether convincing, that’s a lot harder to do in tennis.

The nature of the tennis scoring system means you have to actively win every match you play, and can’t sit back and defend an early lead. It’s very rare - almost unheard of - that a tennis player is described as lucky to win a match, let alone a tournament. You might hear that they should have lost the match or were unconvincing, but the fact they won is normally attributed to their superior mental strength compared to their opponent.

View more!

And over the course of an entire tournament, the winner has generally proven themselves to be the best player in the world at that very moment. In the eyes of those forecasting the future, that’s a pretty persuasive label to have.

There are also far fewer variables in an individual compared to a team sport. When Leicester City won the Premier League in 2016 no-one doubted that they fully deserved their victory, but there was also a tacit acceptance that their best players would sooner or later be sold, others would struggle for motivation, and some would regress to their mean level.

With tennis, we are talking about just one individual, who in winning a major tournament has shown their mental fortitude and proven their ability. It’s extremely rare that a first-time grand-slam winner - unless they are nearing the end of their career - is predicted to never win a second one.

There is perhaps also an emotional bias as well. It is easier for viewers to connect with an individual who they have seen struggle to victory and have heard more from, than in team sports where some of the main players might never have conducted an interview.

This is all really a long-winded way of saying that I have bottled writing the piece I was supposed to - why Djokovic could overtake Federer and become the tennis GOAT.

View more!

It’s not that I don’t think Djokovic could add the seven grand-slam titles needed to surpass Federer’s tally of 20. He absolutely could. But by doing so I would be succumbing once again to recency bias. Because full disclosure: I would not have been making the same prediction in June when Djokovic - fresh from losing at the French Open - threatened to skip the grass-court season.

I am not proposing going entirely the other way and disregarding recent events, but even taking a slightly bigger-picture view can be helpful. Looking at 2018 as a whole, Djokovic, Federer and Rafael Nadal have all won grand slams to burnish their GOAT credentials. They have also all looked at various points more vulnerable than ever before.

Djokovic might have won his majors more recently, but the chances are that next year's biggest prizes will be distributed similarly equitably. Momentum is a huge thing in sport but - as in football and rugby - finishing a season well doesn't necessarily mean you'll start the next one strongly.